[FLASH]

Are mirror lens worth the money? And, which mirror lens manufacturer makes the best ones?

I live on Mobile Bay and want to take telephoto shots of the city across the bay from where I live in Daphne, Alabama. The 500mm-1,000mm mirror lens seem interesting to me although I understand that exposures taken with such lens can't really compare with the Pentax telephoto lens such as the 300mm or larger.

When using the mirror lens, what capabilities of the Pentax cameras such as the ZX-L or ZX-5N are lost? The fixed aperatures of the mirror lens also concern me and does anyone have comments about that limitation?

I understand that Pentax may have made a mirror lens, but I have little knowledge about it, so if anyone has any experience with that lens, please comment on it. I use the Pentax cameras previously mentioned along with the Nikon 8008s so mirror lens that would easily fit on those camera bodies are of interest to me. Further, I expect to purchase the Pentax 10KD so would like to know if any of the mirror lens mentioned will work on that digital platform....

Any comments will be appreciated.

FLASH

[jnorth]

Little to add. Somebody mentioned not being able to get a mirror lens on their K10D because of the way the onboard flash bumps out, and the shape/size of the lens. Not sure if it was here or on some other forum. And I seem to think it was the 500mm.

[Adam]

Have a look at this thread for some more info on mirror lenses: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/6789-mirror-lenses.html

Mirror lenses are good tradeoffs for their size, but if you want high IQ, you can't beat a regular telephoto prime.

[pentkon52]

There is a member of the PDML that has a 500 mirror, not sure of the make, i'll find out, but his photos are very good and quite sharp

Dave

[nathancombs]

i have a soligor 500mm i like it, it is interesting. the best thing is it is small length is just about the same as the 18-55 kit lens bigger around so you can use it at slower stutter speeds i use mine @ 180th no prob. it really short so people do not think your using a long lens good for when i am shoot some things at some photoj stuff when i do not wont to drow attchen to my self. seems to work better on my K10D than my K100D. if it is a sunny day good for sports.

bad points
only 1 f stop f8 some closer to f11 so only good sunny days
donut highlights (not a bother for me)
not as sharp (i am still out on that i gotten good shop photos)
the viewer is darker because of the f8 -f11
it is MF and i think there is no AF for these tip of lens ( i do not mind that )
a different looking DOF (hard to explane but not a bother to me )

from what others have told me you eather like them or you do not

[spyglass]

I have a 500mm Vivitar Mirror lens (f.8) It has been the biggest disapointment. At first I thought that another make might be better so I borrowed a friends 600mm Sigma mirror lens. I was attracted to the whole mirror lens "pit fall" by it's small short size and inexpensive price tag (remember that saying "the cheap and the poor pay twice... the really stupid pay forever"). The images obtain are flat and lack sharpness and contrast. The fix aperture of f.8 limits the lens terribly as it is a very slow lens. The bokeh is distracting at best. Generally any out of focus highlights will render thems as nasty doughnuts. There might be 1 shot in a 1000 where that effect might play off in some abstract way, but most days you will find it detracts from the subject. Look at something in real life, and then look at the same object reflected in the mirror. Anyone can see the quality difference plain as day (even with the mirror lens using first surface mirrors). Also note the number of lens manufactures that used to produce the mirror lenses have stopped making them (I believe Sigma stopped a few years back and have been trying to move their name up the ranks).
Do yourself a favour and stick with ground glass and quailty. Even the lower to mid range lens manufacturers such as Sigma, Tamron, etc can produce a reasonable priced 400mm telephoto lens. I picked up a used 400mm Sigma for $200 (I can not even bring myself to sell my 500mm Vivtar lens because I feel that it is so useless - I could never knowingly rip someone off.

[Entropy]

The mirror lenses vary GREATLY in quality.

From what I've heard, Tamron (or was it Vivitar, may have been a Tamron-rebadged-Vivitar) used to make a very good 500mm mirror (the SP500).

Many of the currently available "$100 new" mirrors apparently have massive quality control problems - some are decent, some are utterly awful.

Mirror lenses will always have somewhat lower resolution than a similar refractor lens, and will also have that annoying donut bokeh. On the other hand even the good ones can be quite cheap and they have the advantage of being very lightweight and compact if you can find one with decent IQ.

I have seen a few places where people had good things to say about mirror lenses (no link offhand though), in general stay far away from the $100 variants, not only do they have bad quality control but they have an inferior design compared to some of the more expensive ones. There are some now discontinued models like the Solid Cat that have good reputations, and as far as currently manufactured models I have heard good things about the Russian Rubinars (Better design than the $100 easy-to-get mirrors). They're hard to get though despite being manufactured new - you can pretty much only get them on eBay or from sites that specialize in selling Russian lenses like rugift.com.

That said, the Rubinars are much more expensive, and in theory you could get a Tamron 70-300 4-5.6 and a 1.4x TC to get nearly the length and about the same aperture, with probably comparable image quality to the 500/8 Rubinar.

There is a 500/5.6 Rubinar that is MUCH more expensive ($380 from rugift and you can never find them on eBay), this might be a very nice lens in terms of having a fast and relatively compact 500mm lens. On the other hand the 500/5.6 is the most likely lens to have a clearance problem with the K10D's flash.

[barondla]

Some of the best mirror lenses are made bt Questor. Expensive but nice. Mirrors do have one advantage over other lenses. They have virtually 0 chromatic aberration. This can be a good thing on digital. All mirrors could be labeled apochromatic.
thanks
barondla

[Entropy]

In theory yes, in reality nearly all mirror lenses use mirrors as their primary element but still have refractive elements. In general the CA is significantly less since most of the "heavy lifting" is done by the mirrors, although I think that with some of the cheaper designs it actually isn't that much better because the few glass elements that are present are so substandard.

[713alan]

I just bought a Sigma 600mm miror lens from one of the forum members. I am interested in them for their small size.

Pentax lists a mirror (relex) lens on their web site. A Pentax 400-600 f8-11 mirror zoom lens recently sold on ebay for just over $500.

From what I've read: The Tamron 500 f8 and Sigma 600 f8 are your best bet at around $250. Avoid the $100 lenses unless it's someone dumping their Tamron or Sigma.

There is an article out there showing that you can take a picture with a good 300mm lens, enlarge it on your computer, and end up with a picture with more contrast and resolution than a picture taken with a good mirror lens. (I believe he used the Sigma.)

I am getting a mirror lens because I don't want to carry a large lens. I'd rather take the shot with a mirror lens than skip the shot.

[Entropy]

As far as I can tell, the only reason to consider mirror is not the price, but the size. Even the 500/5.6 Rubinar mirror is far smaller than many of the fast 300s.

If there were 500/5.6 units more readily available on the used market I'd consider one. Long, relatively fast for its length, and reasonably compact. Unfortunately I'm not quite willing to spend $400 (the price of a new 500/5.6 Rubinar with adapter and shipping) for a lens bought sight unseen without much in terms of reviews supporting that variant. What little I've heard about the Rubinars has been good compared to other mirrors, but I haven't heard much.

[Marc Langille]

sent you a PM

[barondla]

There is a person on fourthirdsphoto.com that uses the Rubinar 500 5.6. He has his test shots on there. Pretty sharp lens. There is unit to unit variation (probably more than we are used too). Check it out.
thanks
barondla

[nathancombs]

here is some photos i took with mine today





would i have reather used my Vivtar seres 1 100-500 yes but it in the shop so i went with what i had.

[Rolly]

Does anyone have first hand experience with cadiotropic (did I spell that right?) mirror lenses?
I know that they are very heavy being almost solid glass, but what were/are their IQ characteristics?